When politicians become gods

Why do nations rise and fall? Why do people yearn for a "strongman" leader who will "save" them? What does it mean to follow Jesus in an age of Trump, Bolsonaro, Putin, Brexit, Duterte, Xi, Modi, Rajapaksa, ...?

This month for the theology reading group we discussed Here are your gods! : Faithful discipleship in idolatrous times by Chris Wright. 

I really liked the book. I found it quite refreshing as Wright expressed concerns that I have felt about Christians and politics for decades. These concerns have increased in past five years. The book gives a solid biblical basis for these concerns.

The book is passionate and Wright speaks forthrightly and honestly about politics in the UK and USA, with Trump and Brexit, and particularly how Christians uncritically support of certain political figures and causes. This is noteworthy because Wright is a quiet reserved diplomatic "Englishman" (he is Irish but has mostly lived in England) who normally writes measured and scholarly tomes and biblical commentaries. [You can get a sense of his personality in his excellent podcast, On Mission where he interviews Christian leaders from the Majority World]. This book is theology from the heart. It is contextual theology. It provides a beautiful example of how the Bible, particularly the Old Testament, speaks so clearly to the current context in the West.

Some of the main ideas that stood out to me are the following.

Human relationships, from the local to the global, are designed to function in certain ways, i.e. according to certain moral principles, centred around justice, mercy, faithfulness, and truth. When organisations, societies and nations organise themselves around these principles they flourish; and when they do not, they decline (eventually). This is how God "causes" nations to rise and fall. In Wright's words (page 73),

"There are moral principles built into our world, since creation, and they apply to all nations, even though they are explicitly revealed in the most articulated form in Israel. This is an important hermeneutical assumption that undergirds the second half of this book."

This important assumption is further discussed on pages 76 and 106. It is good, but too rare, that authors clearly state their assumptions.  

Part one is adapted from material about idolatry in Wright's acclaimed book, The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible's Grand Narrative.

Idols present a paradox. In one sense, they are nothing and with no real power, particularly compared to the living God, YHWH, the Creator of the universe. A wooden idol is just wood. On the other hand, idols do exert power because people believe they do have power.

Idols and gods are largely human constructs, produced by our fallen and rebellious imaginations. Idols are not just statues; they can be ideologies or aspirations. They can be nationalism, prosperity, self, or a "strongman", and of course, money, sex, and power.

The central problem with idolatry is that it blurs the distinction between the Creator and the Creation.

Political leaders use religion to consolidate their power. Consider the case of Jeroboam the first King of Israel. He constructed idols at the north and south of his kingdom so that people might not go to Jerusalem, lest they defect to his rival in Judah (1 Kings 11).

The signs and symptoms of the Western world being in decline include a legacy of historic and systemic violence (colonialism), increasing poverty and inequality, the rise of extreme forms of populism and nationalism, ecological devastation, and the war on truth (chapter 5). The latter is particularly noteworthy. 

What does it say about the state of our culture and politics that two men have risen to top political leadership in the United Kingdom and the United States who are both notoriously and demonstrably addicted to fabrication, exaggeration, false claims, self-contradiction, and downright mendacity? (p. 92)

Furthermore, the attack on truth seems to have become acceptable, even in the church. "It is just the way things are... let's be realistic... if politicians don't stretch the truth they will never get elected..." 

Unfortunately, much of this critique is also true of universities today. Whether it marketing to potential students, research grant applications, or reporting research findings in academic journals it has become expected that members of the university community will put the most positive "spin" on things. Critical, honest, balanced, and realistic assessments are not what is desired.

So justice is driven back,
    and righteousness stands at a distance;
truth has stumbled in the streets,
    honesty cannot enter.
15 Truth is nowhere to be found,
    and whoever shuns evil becomes a prey.

Isaiah 59:15-16

How will political leaders be judged? The mother of King Lemeul taught him

Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves,
    for the rights of all who are destitute.
9 Speak up and judge fairly;
    defend the rights of the poor and needy.

Proverbs 31:8-9

Hopefully, this excellent book will be widely read and discussed. 

There are several things I would like to see expanded by Wright or others.

One is to include some mention and engagement of other authors on political theology such as Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Bauckham, and Oliver O'Donovan.

Here politics is largely defined in terms of elections and government policies. Christians need to compromise and vote for candidates who align best with their values and priorities. However, there is much more to democracy. It is multi-faceted and complex. Other dimensions include the role of the judiciary, civil society, the press, law enforcement, and particularly debate in the public square. The tone, content, diversity, breadth of participation, and the freedom of public debate can have a significant effect not just on who wins elections but on whether human flourishing occurs in society or it self-destructs. Public debate should aim to bring people together for the common good. It should empower not disenfranchise or disillusion.

The Bible offers hope for a better world, both now and in eternity. It is now but not yet. But, given the mess the world is in right now, can Christians actually have hope that things may get better in the next few years, or at least in our lifetime? Living by faith means sowing mustard seeds. Who knows what these seeds might grow to? Small acts of kindness and resistance may multiply in ways not imagined. Kingdoms rise and fall. And sometimes very quickly and in unanticipated ways. I find it helpful to think of things that have happened in my adult lifetime, but which most of us found hard to imagine would ever happen: the fall of the Berlin Wall, end of apartheid, smoking almost banished, environmental concerns become mainstream, the end of military dictatorships in Latin America, the fall of Marcos, ... These changes do not mean that everything is better or that some of these changes have not brought new problems. But, remembering this history is a challenge to hopelessness and a view that "nothing will change".

An extract from the book (pages 42-48) is available here. There are helpful reviews of the book at the Jubilee Centre, the William Temple Foundation, and the Englewood Review of Books.

Who is this powerful man who fell?

He was highly creative and what he produced inspired many.
His success led to him being very powerful in his field.
Women sought help from him and wanted his approval.
Tragically, he used his power to sexually abuse countless (hundreds?) of women over decades.
There were widespread rumours.
Because of who he was and his power many chose not to believe the rumours.
Colleagues covered up for him.
His employer covered up for him.
Only after a New York Times article appeared, did his employer properly address the issue.
Reading about the conduct of this "dirty old man" makes one want to take a shower.
He never took full responsibility, or made appropriate apologies, but blamed others.
Furthermore, he came up with highly convoluted rationalisations for his behaviour.

Who is this man?
You are probably thinking of Harvey Weinstein, the Hollywood producer.

But actually, this history also describes that of the highly influential Mennonite theologian, John Howard Yoder.

Unfortunately, when it comes to sexual abuse it does not matter what the religion, philosophy, denomination, or theological position. They all have their abusers and victims.

There is a new article by Stanley Hauerwas [who played a significant role in bringing Yoder's theology to a wider audience] who wrestles with his own role and response. It makes painful but worthwhile reading.

To me, this tragedy highlights many important lessons.
One lesson is the importance of personal integrity and accountability. Furthermore, as Hauerwas emphasises you cannot separate theology and action. Mind, heart, and body are integrated and inseparable.

Christian leaders (that includes me!) have to take very seriously Paul's exhortation to Timothy:

Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers.

You cannot separate life and doctrine. How you act is just as important as what you believe. Unfortunately, believing and speaking the "right" thing is an awful lot easier than living the right way.

Furthermore, we have an incredible capacity for self-delusion. This is particularly true when power, sex, or money are involved.

On books clubs, politicians, and money

For the past few years I was in a really nice theological "book club" that read and discussed a wide range of meaty works by authors such as Miroslav Volf, Stanley Hauerwas, Albert Wolters, Karl Barth, Augustine, ...
I wrote many posts stimulated by these readings. Unfortunately, the group wound down last year due to declining interest and because our fearsome leader Luke Glanville left Brisbane to take up a new academic position at ANU.

I was delighted last year when I learnt there was another group in Brisbane with similar interests, led by Charles Ringma, and they allowed me to join. This group reads a slightly greater pace, often covering one book per month.

Our first book is Globalisation, Spirituality, and Justice by Daniel Groody. Hopefully, I will write some posts about it. On the lighter side I was amused to read in the first chapter how some have proposed that  politicians in the USA should wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers that clearly display their corporate sponsors.

Is ethics rooted in eschatology?

I am enjoying the reading through Ethics of Hope by Jurgen Moltmann. In the beginning of Chapter 1 he states:

Every Christian ethics is determined by a presupposed eschatology. In differing ethical decisions we must always deal not only with differing ethical conceptions but also with fundamental theological decisions in eschatology, and then in Christology. In this chapter we will make this clear form an apocalyptic eschatology, a christological eschatology, a separistic eschatology, and a transformative eschatology.

I am not sure what is the basis of these bold claims. It may become apparent later in the book.

With regard to the different eschatologies Moltmann argues the first three are inadequate and he favours a transformative one.

Apocalyptic is rooted in the Lutheran doctrine of the Two Kingdoms (church and state). The state is seen as an instrument for law and justice. Moltmann makes the extreme claims (p. 12):

According to the doctrine of the two kingdoms, in worldly structures the Christian acts no differently from other poeple, appropriately and rationally. But that makes him invisible. So in worldly life Christians become anonymous. There is no plan for a specifically and distinguishable Christian ethics.

He further argues that central to apocalyptic eschatology is the notion of the cathechon 
(2 Thess. 2:7-8) concerning the one who restrains the man of lawlessness. This then leads to Armageddon and bizarre ideas such as associated with The Late Great Planet Earth and Hal Lindsey.

A Christological eschatology stems from a Calvinist Kingdom of God theology and finds its most sophisticated expression in Karl Barth. The death and resurrection of Jesus have established the Kingdom of God and "hardly anything is left for a futurist eschatology except the universal unveiling of what God has already brought in Christ." (p.23)

A Separatist eschatology has its roots in the Anabaptists and Stanley Hauerwas is characterised as its modern exponent.

Aside: In 1964 Karl Barth wrote Moltmann a letter criticising his book Theology of Hope and the central role that eschatology played in his theology.

The crisis of ethics in modernism

Stanley Hauerwas has a fascinating article  How "Christian Ethics" Came to Be. 
It argues that prior to the Enlightenment Christians did not separate theology, ethics, and personal discipleship. They were all just part of living the Christian life. However, the Enlightenment ripped away the notion that the Bible and the Church provided a foundation or basis for deciding what was moral. What would the foundation be then?

The birth of modernity is coincident with the beginnings of ethics understood as a distinguishable sphere or realm of human life. Faced with the knowledge of the diversity of moral convictions, modern people think of themselves as haunted by the problem of relativism. If our "ethics" are relative to time and place, what if anything prevents our moral opinions form being "conventional"? And if they are conventional, some assume they must also be "arbitrary". But if your morality is conventional, how can we ever expect to secure agreements between people who disagree? Is it out fate to be perpetually at war with one another? "Ethics" becomes that quest to secure a rational basis for morality so we can be confident that our moral convictions are not arbitrary?

Stanley Hauerwas, How "Christian Ethics" Came to Be (1997)
Reprinted in the Hauerwas Reader, p.43-44.

Hauerwas on discipleship

Discipleship is quite simply extended training in being dispossessed. To become followers of Jesus means that we must, like him, be dispossessed of all that we think gives us power over our own lives and the lives of others. Unless we learn to relinquish our presumption that we can ensure the significance of our lives, we are not capable of the peace of God’s kingdom.

Stanley Hauerwas, The Peaceable Kingdom, 1983

Finding and following an authentic Jesus

Do we need to "find" the "historical" Jesus before we can "follow" him?

I particularly like the paragraph below from Stanley Hauerwas:

Jesus and Social Embodiment of the Peaceable Kingdom (1983).

In a strange way, reading Hauerwas also resonates with reading Radical by David Platt. This morning my son and I read the first chapter and I was struck by the following:

We are molding Jesus into our own image. He is beginning to look a lot like us because, after all, that is whom we are most comfortable with. And the danger now is that when we gather together in our church buildings to sing and lift up our hands in worship, we may not actually be worshiping the Jesus of the Bible. Instead we may be worshiping ourselves.

Exploring theological ethics

I previously posted about a theological reading group I am in which started with Miroslav Wolf's Exclusion and Embrace. We have since read Creation Regained by Wolters. This year we are beginning with a range of separate readings. This fortnight it is some essays by Stanley Hauerwas, arguably one of the most influential living writers on theological ethics. I have not read him before and am enjoying him. The first article is How "Christian ethics" came to be.

Hauerwas has been heavily influenced by Karl Barth and it is interesting to read a short article he wrote for First Things which introduces Barth's Dogmatics in Outline and recommends an annual reading!

Another fascinating article is No, this war would not be moral, published in Time magazine in 2003. It concerns US President Bush's claim that the war against Iraq was justified because Saddam Hussein was 'evil'.